Solving the water crisis

Dear fellows

This is my first post on the forum. I have recently become one of miles mathis's devoted readers. I stumbled upon his work while searching for answers to questions I had in mind. I have been looking for a way to solve the coming water crisis that is about to happen in less than a decade from now.
A lot of you might not know this. But there are parts of the world where drinkable water is barely available for everybody. Mostly it is in the middle east where water resources are shrinking due to heavy use. Sadly, you just can't make people use water economically except by making it expensive. But then people wont be able to afford it.

That is why I'm going the science way to find a solution. The only way I can think of is by turning sea water into drinkable water. But the current methods of doing that are very expensive energy wise. But intuition tells me that there has to be a very efficient way to do it, if only we could understand the science of salt and water.

One might ask me, why dont you join a university and do research there? The reason is that I am aware that it is a dead end. I have read the latest mainstream papers on water desalination. But they are nowhere close to what I'm searching for. And their research is based on false science. Science that never made sense to me, which led me to find miles mathis.

I believe he has answers to the most fundamental questions like, how salts ionize in water, how electric current breaks water molecules, how ions migrate in a field of electric potential difference.
Thankfully I have found some clues in his papers on stacked spins, constructing the nucleus, the salt atom explained, and many others.

If there is anyone interested in walking this journey, I would gladly join a discussion. If anyone can point me in the right direction to find answers, your help will be appreciated.

.
Welcome marwan91. I’m stunned by the magnitude of your suggested ‘project’. Providing cheap and plentiful potable water is a wonderful idea. Pardon me for saying that that problem/solution has occurred to most sentient humans on the planet. You may be extremely optimistic or idealistic, but I happen to agree that there must be economically feasible technical solutions made available given our understanding of charge field physics.

With that in mind, doing a water purification/desalination word search here at the site turns up a few hits in Cr6’s graphene posts.

http://milesmathis.the-talk.net/t123-mathis-on-graphene-any-hints#2411
Re: Mathis on Graphene? Any hints?
 by Cr6 on Sun Apr 16, 2017 11:36 pm

Could ‘miracle’ material graphene finally have a use by making seawater drinkable?

Published time: 4 Apr, 2017 15:52

Water, water everywhere, but not a drop to drink? The Rime of the Ancient Mariner may soon be left redundant now that scientists have devised a sieve made of ‘miracle material’ graphene capable of removing salt molecules from seawater, rendering it safe to drink.

Microscopic filtration might be possible with graphene filters seems like a most reasonable solution to me, and we can certainly better understand behavior at the atomic level than ever before.

What are your initial preferred solutions?
.

Graphene is indeed a promising solution for water desalination. But it is still facing some challenges that prevents it from being used on a mass scale. One of these challenges is making the graphene membranes conveniently porous to pass the water molecules but block the salt. Until they make that possible and feasable on mass scale. I'd like to work in parallel and to find a radically different approach to treat water.

First, What I'm suggesting is to build computer simulations based on miles mathis' theories. To help understand matter on the atomic level. I have seen the graphical simulations of atoms and spinning photons on Nevyns lab, and they are very helpful to me. But these are not actually functional simulations, they are more of visualization tools. I want to write simulations that accurately predict the behavior of particles, and really put miles' theories to test, and I haven't seen anything like that so far being done for mathisian physics. Building atomic nuclie using imagination feels difficult to me. It is like predicting where all the pool balls will end up when you strike, even though you know the physics of pool balls and can model them with equations. But computers can do that job for you.

I can write code such as in python or java. But I still have big knowledge gaps in understanding miles' theories, I do read continuously to patch up those gaps. But some help from others who are better than me in physics would make a difference.

This should have been suggested as an entirely different project. But my main motivation for it is overcoming the water crisis so I post it here.

.
If you want charge field simulations to save the world; and need theoretical, technical or general support, I’d say welcome. Thank you very much. I’ve never gotten the impression that Miles has done any coding. I know he’s had various “internet issues” at times; feel free to ask him questions.

Heck, you’d be welcome even if you only had a comment or question or two.

We are a small group. It sounds like you know coding a lot better than I. Keep in mind we can get a bit sensitive about our ideas and our work. We must all strive for greater understanding and skill. Please give or take ideas or criticism without taking or making it personal.

marwan91 wrote. I want to write simulations that accurately predict the behavior of particles, and really put miles' theories to test.

Airman. Sounds good, anything specific in mind?
.

I should start with simulating the proton and the electron. By giving them their theorized spins, then immersing them in a virtual charge field, and seeing if the proton will recycle charge the way it should by sucking it from the poles and emitting it equatorially. And seeing whether an electron and a proton will cling into each other when they meet or whether they will collapse into each other.

Here are some questions that I need answers to, to be able to produce the simulations.

1- why does the proton not travel linearly at the speed of light like photons do? And so is with the electron.

2- from reading miles' papers, I got that the proton is a B-photon that has acquired high kinetic energy that causes it to spin on multiple levels. Why does it not lose its energy when colliding with regular B-photons? Is it because it absorbs the the energy of other smaller parrticles and thats why it keeps spinning?

3-Miles says that photons have discrete wavelengths because they always spin at no less that the speed of light. Then how do you explain the continuous spectrum of, lets say, the incandescent lamp?

4- Can someone reproduce the stacked spins of the proton and the electron in the spin motion simulator? Because I couldn't understand how exactly do they spin from reading miles' papers.

.

marwan91 wrote. I should start with simulating the proton and the electron, … .

Airman. Excuse me for stopping there. A lot easier said than done, I’ll try to explain why.

You mentioned python or java. Do you have any preferred tools? I like autocad, and have learned some R. Nevyn once suggested I learn three js. It’s free and you can work in your own browser. That idea’s paying off, as shown by the Animate the PI = 4 experiment https://milesmathis.forumotion.com/t554p75-animate-the-pi-4-experiment#5712 .

I believe Jared Magneson is an animation expert. His tool of choice is maya. If you want to output an animation stream you might contact him.

You said you wanted a physical model that can put Miles’ ideas to the test. Nevyn’s simulations are much more than visualization tools, he’s a programming engineer devoted to following the real physics.

The truth is, we're missing a lot of details. Some allowances must be made. Do electrons and protons have surfaces? If so how would you describe them? Odds are, even if we both agreed on the charge field, we wouldn’t necessarily agree on the photonic nature of the electron or proton surfaces.

marwan91 wrote. Here are some questions that I need answers to, to be able to produce the simulations.

1- why does the proton not travel linearly at the speed of light like photons do? And so is with the electron.

Airman. I’ve read Miles explanation several times, you shouldn’t have much difficulty finding one and reading the proper description. Here’s my take on it.
Protons and electrons do not travel on their own, they are carried in some net charge displacement. The most extreme events I know occur during massive solar bursts. At such time I believe electrons may reach 0.3-0.5 light speed. I believe protons may travel at a tenth that. Usually isolated protons (and electrons to a lesser degree) traveling linearly through space must pass through a charge field domains, the local photon medium, star or planet, some dominant charge field source. Photon cross traffic in any system would present an atmospheric (for electrons) or fluid like (for protons) resistance – all those particle/photon collisions. They present a constant resistance which end up causing a sort of terminal velocity.

marwan91 wrote. 2- from reading miles' papers, I got that the proton is a B-photon that has acquired high kinetic energy that causes it to spin on multiple levels. Why does it not lose its energy when colliding with regular B-photons? Is it because it absorbs the the energy of other smaller parrticles and thats why it keeps spinning?’

Airman. I don’t share that B-photon understanding and so I’ll differ that question.

marwan91 wrote. 3-Miles says that photons have discrete wavelengths because they always spin at no less that the speed of light. Then how do you explain the continuous spectrum of, lets say, the incandescent lamp?

Airman. A photon has a discrete wavelengths due to its radius. The radius is a function of the photon energy level. Every photon can be at a different energy. Usually a given charge field scenario may begin to moderate all matter in the vicinity. An incandescent lamp is a very energetic and not very efficient source of all sorts of high energy visible photons.

marwan91 wrote. 4- Can someone reproduce the stacked spins of the proton and the electron in the spin motion simulator? Because I couldn't understand how exactly do they spin from reading miles' papers.

Airman. I must again differ to Nevyn.

Please don’t get the idea I’m being uncooperative – I’m just saying they are much more complicated than you've indicated. The tasks you’ve identified present quite a challenge. I'm anxious to help. If you come up with a more focused, simpler task, you'd greatly increase the probability of getting it done.

Modeling an electron or a proton would be a fine start.
.

LongtimeAirman, thank you very much for your advice and for sharing your knowledge. Simulating the physics is indeed a difficult task, but it's worth trying.

As for the tools, I'm thinking of using a 3d game engine, similar to unity, to simulate particles, but it will be tricky to find a game engine to handle millions of particles without crashing.

I know how to use 3ds max to create simple animations, I have played around with max script before. Or I might learn blender because it is so similar. But these software are too complicated for the task. So I will stick to a simple game engine.

In the mean time, I will keep on reading miles' papers until I find what I need to make a first attempt in realizing my idea, and I will share the outcome.

Welcome marwan91,

Like LTAM mentions there are a few indicators that this could work with the right nano-Graphene mesh or bi-layer graphene mesh. Might require more energy for using near frozen seawater which might concentrate the salt more. A simple bi-layer graphene sheet slightly twisted could possibly do it. Keep this is at the nano-level to do it right...possibly gating with multiple layers of nano-graphene could do it. Might be possible with some of the newer manufacturing methods for graphene sheets. There is still a lot of room for experimentation with this to remove the salt from the filters:
-----------


Making Salt Water Drinkable Just Got 99 Percent Easier
Andrew Tarantola
3/15/13 8:00PM

Filed to:Water
342.1K

Access to steady supplies of clean water is getting more and more difficult in the developing world, especially as demand skyrockets. In response, many countries have turned to the sea for potable fluids but existing reverse osmosis plants rely on complicated processes that are expensive and energy-intensive to operate. Good thing, engineers at Lockheed Martin have just announced a newly-developed salt filter that could reduce desalinization energy costs by 99 percent.

The Reverse Osmosis process works on a simple principle: molecules within a liquid will flow across a semipermeable membrane from areas of higher concentration to lower until both sides reach an equilibrium. But that same membrane can act as a filter for large molecules and ions if outside pressure is applied to one side of the system. For desalinization, the process typically employs a sheet of thin-film composite (TFC) membrane which is made from an active thin-film layer of polyimide stacked on a porous layer of polysulfone. The problem with these membranes is that their thickness requires the presence of large amounts of pressure (and energy) to press water through them.

Lockheed Martin's Perforene, on the other hand, is made from single atom-thick sheets of graphene. Because the sheets are so thin, water flows through them far more easily than through a conventional TFC. Filters made through the Perforene process would incorporate filtering holes just 100 nm in diameter—large enough to let water molecules through but small enough to capture dissolved salts. It looks a bit like chicken wire when viewed under a microscope, John Stetson, the Lockheed engineer credited with its invention, told Reuters. But ounce for ounce, its 1000 times stronger than steel.

More at link:
https://gizmodo.com/making-salt-water-drinkable-just-got-99-percent-easier-5990876

marwan91 wrote:I should start with simulating the proton and the electron...

1- why does the proton not travel linearly at the speed of light like photons do? And so is with the electron.

2- from reading miles' papers, I got that the proton is a B-photon that has acquired high kinetic energy that causes it to spin on multiple levels. Why does it not lose its energy when colliding with regular B-photons? Is it because it absorbs the the energy of other smaller parrticles and thats why it keeps spinning?

3-Miles says that photons have discrete wavelengths because they always spin at no less that the speed of light. Then how do you explain the continuous spectrum of, lets say, the incandescent lamp?

4- Can someone reproduce the stacked spins of the proton and the electron in the spin motion simulator? Because I couldn't understand how exactly do they spin from reading miles' papers.

Welcome to the forum! You ask decent questions and seem a nice person. I'll try to answer them if possible. I have done some work in Maya on simulating the subatomic particles and how charge links them together to form atoms.

Here's a charge simulation of Hydrogen:
https://vimeo.com/207040350


And here is one of Helium:
https://vimeo.com/264207959


It's a bit easier to see Helium in reverse:
https://vimeo.com/320694284

I also made a few mistakes back then but these should help you visualize the structures a bit. Those are straight keyframed videos though, not physical simulations. Here is a better, more physically accurate simulation (unfinished really, but it might help anyway) showing how the electrons, neutrons, and protons interact:
https://vimeo.com/208245448


Here are some physical simulations where I keyframed nothing, and let the particles themselves do the work, starting with a simple 3-body charge vs. gravity simulation:
https://vimeo.com/327650447


As far as I'm aware, nobody has ever done that before. Einstein and Minkowski couldn't. I myself couldn't - not without Miles' and Nevyn's work and input. I just do my best to show these theories visually, and often make mistakes but I'm still learning and figuring things out too. Better stuff will come, just takes a lot of WORK!

Here's a video showing how the 2/3 charge entering at the South Pole causes the Earth's spin:
https://vimeo.com/308032663

But I think this is my best and most important (and accurate) video so far. This one shows how a simple, single-spin photon is "spun up" into a larger-radius photon, showing every collision that can upspin it along the way:
https://vimeo.com/276665562


So now on to your questions:

1. The larger particles don't travel at light speed because they are constantly colliding with other particles AND light itself. And they are also so large their linear speed has become recursive. They move backwards along their path, in their own spins. Light (photons) moves at light speed simply because there's nothing to slow it except matter which will either spin it up into a larger particle or redirect it (refract, reflect).

2. The photon doesn't absorb energy, it is either reflected, refracted, or spun up or down. If it's spun up enough, it becomes an electron or neutron or proton. If it's spun down enough, it can become a single-spin (one axis) "B-photon" again. The term is a bit outdated. All matter is the same particle, just with more or fewer spin-stacks. A proton is still physically a photon, just with 16 or so spins (not sure about that number, we've had some debate but we haven't closed in on it exactly that I'm aware of, still need to do this). But you are correct that a proton, say, keeps it's spin state because of constant photon (charge) pressure - or loses it if there's too much pressure or it collides with another proton/neutron in a certain way.

3. There is no "continuous spectrum" of a lamp. It's an average. An incandescent bulb is also hot, yes? That's infrared-wavelength photons. The brightness is visible-wavelength photons. It will also emit some amount of radio/microwave/higher/lower photons, though perhaps not enough to register on our detectors and probably not very many, say, x-ray or gamma level photons. Not enough energy being input to do that from a light bulb.

Here's a video showing how wavelength exists as a result of stacked spins, once the linear movement is taken into account:
https://vimeo.com/262448408


Your question doesn't really make sense otherwise but we can expand upon it if you like. That is, your question seems unrelated to your statement. Feel free to clarify?

4. Hopefully I've already answered this one in the videos. They're really short, so I hope you can watch them all and by all means, ask more questions and if you see anything fishy or wrong, it's MY fault, not Miles'.